RESTRICTED  WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  WT/COMTD/AFT/M/1 
18 May 2007 
 (07-2040) 
Committee on Trade and Development 
First Session on Aid for Trade  
 
 
NOTE ON THE MEETING OF 2 APRIL 2007 
 
Chairman:  H.E. Mr. Shree B. C. Servansing (Mauritius) 
  
A.
 THE CTD  AND AID FOR TRADE – INTRODUCTORY STATEMENT BY THE CHAIRMAN .................1  
B. AID FOR TRADE BASELINE FIGURES AND DEFINITIONS (2002-2005)  PRESENTED BY 
THE OECD' S DEVELOPMENT ASSISTANCE COMMITTEE .............................................................5  
• CURRENT DEVELOPMENT AID FLOW S TO REGIONS AND PROGRAMMES ......................................5  
• FUTURE TRENDS ..........................................................................................................................5  
C. OECD  CONTRIBUTION TO WTO  MONITORING FRAMEWORK ....................................................7  
 
 
A. THE CTD  AND AID FOR TRADE – INTRODUCTORY STATEMENT BY THE CHAIRMAN  
1. The draft agenda was contained in Airgram WTO/AIR/2983 of 21 March 2007.  The Agenda 
was adopted . 
2. The Chairman  explained how the Committee on Tr ade and Development (CTD) might 
structure its future programme of work on Aid for Trade.  The fundamental purpose of the Aid for 
Trade Initiative was to increase th e resources available for Aid for Tr ade and to ensure that these 
resources were delivered and used more effectively – all with the aim of helping developing countries 
to benefit more from trade.  He said that last year, the Aid for Trade Task Force provided a number of recommendations for reaching this goal.  In partic ular, it called for strengthening the "demand side," 
as well as the donor "response" and closing the gap be tween "demand" and "response" at the country, 
regional and global level.  The Task Force also suggested that the WTO could best advance this 
agenda by better monitoring and evaluating Aid for Trade. 
3. The Chairman said the CTD could play a key role in moving from the policy discussion phase 
of Aid for Trade to the implementation phase.  He recalled that in a statement to the General Council 
on 14 December 2006, the Director-General set out a proposal for monitoring and evaluation at three levels:  (1) global monitoring, carried out by th e OECD's Development Assistance Committee (DAC);  
(2) donor monitoring, in the form of self-evalu ations and (3) in-country assessments, done by the 
recipients.  He suggested that these inputs should be  addressed in "periodic reviews" in the CTD – in 
order to give all Members an opportunity to discuss the findings and express their views – with the aim of weaving the various thread s together in an annual report and Aid for Trade debate in the 
General Council, beginning in the autumn. 
4. The Chairman proposed a tentative roadmap for 2007.  To launch the process, the 
OECD-DAC Secretariat had been asked to give  a preliminary global perspective on Overseas 
Development Aid (ODA) flows related to trade, drawing on its existing Creditor Reporting System 
(CRS).  As a next step the CTD would invite  multilateral and bilateral agencies to share the 
preliminary results of their self-evaluations.  Th e relevant multilateral agencies would address the WT/COMTD/AFT/M/1 
Page 2  
 
  CTD in the months ahead and then meet with key b ilateral donors.  Next, the Secretariat planned to 
hold three regional Aid for Trade reviews – one in Latin America, one in Asia, and one in Africa – 
organized in cooperation with the World Bank and the relevant Regional De velopment Banks, with 
the regional banks taking the lead on the ground.   The results and recommendations flowing from 
these events would then be presented and discussed in  the CTD.  He said the CTD would also need to 
play a role in shaping the annual Aid for Trade Repor t that is to be presented to the General Council 
in November 2007.  He emphasized that what he  had just outlined was not an exhaustive list of 
activities and that Aid for Trade was a work in progress.  He invited Deputy Director-General 
Alejandro Jara to give the Secretariat's perspective on Aid for Trade. 
5. The Deputy Director-General
 described the proposed ar chitecture for Aid for Trade 
monitoring and evaluation.  He said that the Dir ector-General's statement to the General Council on 
14 December 2006 envisaged monitoring at three le vels.  The first level would provide a global 
picture of flows each year by relying on the ex isting OECD database – the CRS.  The second level of 
reporting – namely donor self-evaluation – would give  a more specific and detailed picture of Aid for 
Trade activities by asking multilateral, regional and bilateral development agencies to report annually 
on their current work and future plans.  The third level will be country-based monitoring and 
evaluation with the goal to provide a more focu sed, country-specific perspective on whether trade 
needs are being met, financial resources are being provided, and whether Aid for Trade was effective 
on the ground.  In this context, he said the WT O would organize three regional reviews of Aid for 
Trade – in Latin America, Asia and Africa – not onl y to capture what was going on at the country and 
regional level, but to encourage recipients, donors an d the private sector to discuss concrete priorities 
and how best to address them.  
6. The focal point for all these inputs would be an annual report and Aid for Trade debate in the 
General Council, in late 2007, where the various th reads would be woven together into a coherent 
whole.  The CTD would play a central role in gi ving Members an opportunity to discuss these inputs 
and express their views. The Deputy Director-General  emphasised two points about the process: first, 
that the preliminary numbers which the OECD woul d share reflected the OECD's own definition of 
Aid for Trade, based on the Task Force's recommendations.  These numbers would not – and should not be expected to – match the numbers provi ded by individual donors because the scope and 
definition of Aid for Trade used by Japan, the United States (US) , the European Communities (EC) 
and others differed, sometimes significantly.  That was why donors would be asked for their own self-assessment of progress and effectiveness based on th eir own definitions.  Second, even the OECD 
numbers only captured ODA spending relating to trade, not Aid for Trade precisely.  In other words, they reflected how much was invested in airports or  roads, not the exact percentage of these "airports" 
or "roads" that was trade-related.  
 
7. He added that the overall objective of the process was to use greater transparency as a tool to 
encourage progress, to raise awaren ess, to focus on priorities, to highlight what was happening – or 
not happening - and to create incentives for recipients and donors to work together more effectively in 
order to produce results. "Coherence" would be abso lutely critical to this agenda.  The WTO cannot – 
and should not – deliver or implement Aid for Trade.  In this sense, the WTO's role was catalytic – 
ensuring that the lead development agencies and organizations understand the trade needs of WTO 
Members, and encouraging them to wo rk together to address these needs.  
8. The representative of Costa Rica  said that Aid for Trade should ensure that new and existing 
resources are used in the most efficient way.  He said that Aid for Trade should also be used to 
facilitate adjustment to trade liberalization r esulting from the Doha Development Agenda (DDA).  
Therefore, he proposed to include the needs that ar ise because of preference erosion to the topics 
discussed in the context of Aid for Trade.  The Wo rld Bank, the IMF and the donors should also be 
involved in monitoring and formulating actions to deal effectively with the problems of preference 
erosion.  WT/COMTD/AFT/M/1 
 Page 3 
 
 
  9. The representative of Côte d'Ivoire  expressed concern that the Aid for Trade process was not 
part of the single undertaking but that most of the initiative was linked to the results in the DDA.  He 
said that developing countries would be able to co ntribute to shaping the Aid for Trade initiative as 
long as they were listened to.  He added that Aid for Trade should not be offered in exchange of 
developing countries dropping some of  their demands in the negotiations. 
10. The representative of Ecuador  asked for a special meeting of the CTD to discuss Aid for 
Trade as a solution to the problems faced by many developing countries due to preference erosion.  
He said the Director-General w ith the assistance of the Chairman should inform Members about the 
possible solutions to the problem of preference erosion. 
11. The representative of Pakistan  expressed support for the statement made by Costa Rica. 
12. The representative of the United States  asked the Secretariat to provide a calendar of events 
that would specify when particular inputs were required from donors and recipients.  She said that the agreed path with respect to monitoring should be simp le, straightforward, transparent and practical.  It 
should avoid the creation of a new bureaucratic structure and minimize the transaction costs for all participants. 
13. The representative of Kenya
 said the link between Aid for Trade and preferences had no place 
in the CTD, because this was under discussion  in  the Non-Agricultural Market Access (NAMA) 
negotiations.  He said that Aid for Trade was not a negotiating subject and that he would not like to see the discussion on Aid for Trade used as a forum to  resolve problems or anticipated problems that 
are likely to occur in the negotiations, rather th an implementing their outcome.  Only after the 
outcome of the negotiations in NAMA on preference erosion was known, could the CTD discuss how 
Aid for Trade may be used to assist Members in  coping with their commitments resulting from the 
negotiations. 
14. The representative of the European Communities
 said officials in Brussels were working hard 
on an Aid for Trade implementation strategy.  He said monitoring in the CTD was a key part of the multilateral process. He said he supported the views e xpressed by the US and that there was a need to 
provide added value to other monitoring systems th at are used to monitor development cooperation 
flows.  He explained that the monitoring system al so needed to have credibility and that this could 
only be achieved if all participants  actively engaged in its design.  He broadly supported the idea of 
having three layers of monitoring, as outlined by th e Chairman.  However, some questions remained 
regarding the global system and the use of CRS data .  Some questions remained also on what was 
expected from the donors and recipients in their self- evaluations.  He believed the issue of monitoring 
should be further discussed in the CTD and wonder ed whether there would be an opportunity to 
discuss private sector investment outside of the regional assessment meetings. 
15. The representative of Panama
 said it was important to discuss the issue of preference erosion 
and how to deal with this issue through Aid for Trade. 
16. The representative of Cameroon  said it may be necessary to have a session on the definition 
of Aid for Trade and expressed concern about th e slippage that could take place by discussing 
preference erosion in the CTD Session on Aid for Tr ade.  He expressed support to the statement made 
by the representative of Kenya. 
17. The representative of Costa Rica  said that he was not trying to suggest a substitution of the 
discussions that were taking place on preference eros ion in NAMA or Agriculture with a discussion in 
the CTD.  He said that trade adjustment was an im portant part of the Aid for Trade mandate and it 
would be helpful to discuss the needs of developing countries in regard to Aid for Trade in the CTD.  
These needs included trade adjust ment for preference erosion. WT/COMTD/AFT/M/1 
Page 4  
 
  18. The representative of Nigeria
 said it would be useful to have a broad consensus on the scope 
of the definition of Aid for Trade in light of the statement made by Kenya.  This would enable Members to avoid controversy and to have clarity on the objectives of Aid for Trade and the discussions in the CTD. 
19. The representative of Jamaica
 expressed support for the statement made by the representative 
of Kenya on preference erosion.  She saw value in  a separate approach for Aid for Trade as this 
recognized that the multilateral trading system was imposing costs on developing countries.  She 
believed that Aid for Trade was a subset of develo pment aid, the latter being demand driven based on 
the priorities of the countries.  She added that operationalizing Aid for Trade should not compromise 
the possibilities of pursuing areas of prioriti es in terms of wider development aid. 
20. The representative of Haiti  supported the statement made by the representative of Kenya on 
preference erosion.  He also requested more inform ation on the role played by regional organizations 
in Aid for Trade. 
21. The representative of Benin  recalled that the origin of Aid for Trade was to address the supply 
capacity constraints of developing countries to allo w them to benefit more fully from opportunities to 
engage in trade.  He said that Aid for Trade  w ould constitute additional aid aimed to boost the trade 
of developing countries and that it was important not to include in Aid for Trade other types of 
assistance. It was equally important to set up a mech anism for the CTD to monitor the additionality of 
the aid being provided. 
22. The representative of Uganda  on behalf of the African Group said it was very difficult to 
disentangle trade from production, and the African c ountries needed aid to build basic infrastructure 
to increase exports in goods and services, and be effectively integrated in the multilateral trade 
system.  Aid for Trade would allow them to enha nce growth prospects, reduce poverty and distribute 
the global benefits across and within developing countries and LDCs.  He hoped that the resources 
from Aid for Trade would be additional and meet th e needs of developing countries.  He added that 
Aid for Trade should not be included among the solutions  to preference erosion.  He said that there 
was a need to have country ownership of Aid for Trade to fully mainstream trade into development 
strategies.  He said he wanted to see the full implementation of the recommendations made by the Aid 
for Trade Task Force and proposed the creation of a Consultative Group in order to follow up on 
those recommendations.  He also hoped that Aid fo r Trade would help countries build the necessary 
infrastructure to increase cross-border and regiona l trade.  He called for the establishment of a 
regional Aid for Trade committee as soon as it was feasible.   He said he also wanted to see a timetable 
set for the review of the recommendations of the Aid for Trade Task Force. 
23. The representative of Zambia  expressed support to the statements made by the representatives 
of Uganda and Benin.  He stressed that Aid for Trade should not be mixed with current development 
aid but that it should be additional to such aid.  
24. The representative of Nicaragua  said that creating national capacities and identifying 
priorities in the recipient countries was an important element in ensuring the effectiveness of aid.  She 
also thought that it was important to discuss preference erosion as well as other systemic issues such as competitiveness, infrastructure, diversificati on of exports and coherence between trade and 
sustainable development strategies.  
25. The representative of Sri Lanka
 said that African countries were not the only ones in need of 
specific attention when it came to Aid for Trade.  He agreed that Aid for Trade should be practical, in 
the sense that countries that needed  it the most would receive it on a priority basis.  He also believed 
that the issue of what role Aid for Trade should play in the context of preference erosion was debatable.  He emphasized that Aid for Trade s hould address trade adjustment and not evolve in a  WT/COMTD/AFT/M/1 
 Page 5 
 
 
  vacuum.  If certain adjustments were needed to deal  with new trade developmen ts, this should be part 
of the discussions in the CTD.   
26. The representative of Kenya  said that the CTD had the mandate to monitor the developmental 
aspects in all the negotiating groups, this included the discussions on preference erosion.  He warned 
against duplicating the work of the CTD in the context of the discussions on Aid for Trade.  
27. The representative of Bolivia  said that Aid for Trade must involve additional resources and 
should address the actual needs of each Member.  Also Aid for Trade should address the adjustments 
that some countries will  have to make as a result of the impact of preference erosion.  She said that 
the resources made available through Aid for Tr ade should not have conditions attached.   
28. The representative of Ecuador  said that many developing Members had problems with the 
concentration of exports because of a lack of suppl y capacity and diversification in production.  This 
common problem should be addressed through Aid for Tr ade.  He added that it was clear that many 
developing countries would face the problem of pr eference erosion resulting from multilateral trade 
liberalisation.  Therefore, regardless of the r esults that would come out from the Agriculture and 
NAMA negotiating groups, it was important for the CT D to look at the issue of how Aid for Trade 
could facilitate the adjustment of developing countries faced with the problem of preference erosion.  
He said that this had already been proposed in the NAMA negotiations.  However, since these bodies 
had no expertise on Aid for Trade, it was not possibl e that a solution involving Aid for Trade for the 
problem of preference erosion could come out of the NAMA and Agriculture negotiating groups.  
This is why it was important to discuss preferen ce erosion in the CTD Session on Aid for Trade.  
29. The Chairman  confirmed that the Secretariat was in the process of putting together a calendar 
of events on Aid for Trade and that it would share it with Members as soon as possible.  He agreed 
that the monitoring mechanism should be simple, cred ible and practical.  However, this required the 
full participation of Members.  He noted that th e scope for applicability and eligibility of who would 
benefit from Aid for Trade had been made very clear in the recommendations of the Task Force 
endorsed by the General Council.  This also incl uded the subjects that should be discussed under Aid 
for Trade, and it was an inclusive agenda. 
B. AID FOR TRADE BASELINE FIGURES AND DEFINITIONS (2002-2005)  PRESENTED BY THE 
OECD' S DEVELOPMENT ASSISTANCE COMMITTEE  
• CURRENT DEVELOPMENT AID FLOW S TO REGIONS AND PROGRAMMES  
• FUTURE TRENDS  
30. The Chairman  introduced Mr. Richard Carey, Direct or of the Development Cooperation of 
the OECD.  The representative of the OECD said that  the new role for WTO in monitoring Aid for 
Trade would be to assess whether aid is delivering increased trade capacity.  This assessment involved 
international scrutiny and there would be incentives fo r better aid in both donor and partner countries.  
This would enhance coherence be tween development and trade.  He said that the monitoring 
objectives were enhanced transparency on Aid for Tr ade flows and pledges, as well as, increased aid 
effectiveness.  Effectiveness would be increased by providing incentiv es for everyone to do better, for 
every individual actor to do better, for all to do better collectively.  He recalled that the Paris 
declaration on aid effectiveness had five principles :  ownership, which stands for demand-driven 
strategies on the part of developing countries;  a lignment, which stands for donor countries working 
together to help the developing countries implem ent their strategy;  harmonization, which meant 
donors cooperating together to reduce transaction co sts and achieve a better division of labour;  
emphasis on results;  and accountability.  These were the key elements that were sought through this 
new architecture.   WT/COMTD/AFT/M/1 
Page 6  
 
  31. He said the new monitoring architecture was divide d into three tiers that were related to each 
other.  The first tier concerned the global monitoring  of trade related aid flow s.  This would be done 
using the CRS of the OECD-DAC.  The second tier concerned the donors' self-assessment reports.  
The third tier concerned in-country assessments.  He  noted that cross-border and regional Aid for 
Trade was also very important and so individual national strategies should also be seen in a regional 
context.  He pointed out that the WTO had a trad e policy review mechanism which could be enriched 
by the Aid for Trade monitoring process.  He said th at measuring would be done on all the three tiers 
using an enlarged definition on Aid for Trade, on the basis of the CRS.   
32. In the three-tiered architecture, the CRS would help with the first tier overall monitoring of 
Aid for Trade since this was a gl obal database of financial commi tments and disbursements.  The 
CRS contained comparable data across time and countries which would allow analysis of global 
trends, including additionality.  In the second tier, d onors' reports would help in tracking fulfilment of 
pledges and reviewing the finer detail on Aid fo r Trade coverage.  In tier three, in-country 
assessments, with a regional component, would allo w connecting the measurements to the national 
strategies for trade development. 
33. Regarding the definition of Aid for Trade, he  said that the Aid for Trade Task Force had 
broadened the old Doha definition, which include d only aid for trade policy regulation and trade 
development, to also include aid for trade-re lated infrastructure, building productive capacity, 
trade-related adjustment and other trade-related need s, if explicitly identified as trade-related priorities 
in the recipient country's national development st rategies.  So the broad agenda was a trade and 
growth agenda, as it was very hard to separate them. 
34. Regarding the CRS, he said this was a data base which the DAC had created more than 
20 years ago and was constantly improving.  The CRS  covered more than 90 per cent of total ODA, 
and had an extensive system of purpose codes, that  has been debated and refined over the years.  
These codes covered the proposed Aid for Trade cat egories in the fields of trade policy and 
regulation, economic infrastructure, including en ergy transport, telecommunications, water for 
irrigation, and others.   
35. He noted that the CRS was always a work-in- progress and could be adapted for the purposes 
of the Aid for Trade monitoring system.  One of th e key areas in the CRS was that of general budget 
support, which had been used for increasing expenditu res on health and education in the context of the 
poverty reduction strategies.  Gene ral budget support was now being used  for trade-related adjustment 
purposes. 
36. He said that using the current CRS categories, statistics showed that over the period 2002 to 
2005 commitments for trade development assistance we re just over US$2 billion, productive capacity 
building assistance overall US$9 billion, infrastruct ure over US$11 billion and general budget support 
averaged US$5 billion. 
37. Regarding actual disbursements in these categor ies, he said that for 2005 trade policy and 
regulation totalled just over half a billion dolla rs, productive capacity building US$5.6 billion, 
infrastructure was US$5.7 billion and general budget  support was US$2.5 billion.  He noted that 
disbursements were always less than commitments. 
38. Regarding the regional distribution of disburseme nts, he said that in Africa quite a significant 
proportion of aid had been provided for general bu dget support.  He said that the credit reporting 
system still needed be fine
 tuned to be as helpful as possible to Aid for Trade monitoring.  A joint 
WTO-OECD working group was examining the existi ng database to specify what refinements should 
be made.  The OECD-DAC Working Party on Sta tistics, which was the guardian of the credit  WT/COMTD/AFT/M/1 
 Page 7 
 
 
  reporting system, would meet in J une to try to develop purpose codes that would be of assistance to 
the Aid for Trade monitoring process. 
39. Next he showed the projections of Overseas Development Assistance (ODA) to 2010.  He 
observed that commitments which had been made since the Monterrey Financing for Development 
Conference in 2002 called for an additional US$50 billion of ODA from 2004 to 2010.  This included 
the doubling of aid for Africa from US$25 to US$50 billion.  These commitments were reaffirmed by 
a meeting of the G8 development ministers in Berlin and included the Hong Kong Aid for Trade pledges and the Gleneagles commitments.  He noted  that the international community was still 
undertaking a big debt relief effort which explai ned the slight projected increases in ODA for 2007 
and 2008.  However, for the years 2009 and 2010, there would need to be a very sharp scaling up of 
aid if the objectives that had been fixed so far were to be met.  He believed the Aid for Trade agenda 
had a big contribution to make to that scaling up.  He noted that the statistics for 2006, that were yet to be released, would show that there had been a fall of 5 per cent in 2006 in ODA because of debt relief.  
Without debt relief ODA had fallen by 1.8 per cen t.  A substantial annual increase in ODA was 
needed. 
40. Regarding the overall composition of ODA, he not ed that Aid for Trade, using the definition 
in the Task Force report, amounted to 26 per cen t of total ODA.  Forty-one per cent of ODA was 
spent in social and administrativ e infrastructure, including on education, health and governance.  He 
observed that these categories were not irrelevant to Aid for Trade, since any country which wanted to 
diversify its economy and its exports  would have to pay attention to  its human resources base.  This 
should not be ignored when carrying out the Aid for Trade monitoring.   
41. He compared the advantages and disadvantag es between the CRS database and expanding the 
joint database.  He said that the CRS database would have a baseline of 2002 to 2005, it would 
provide data on commitments and disbursement a nd allow comparability across time and countries.  
He explained that it would be more robust and that  it did not need additional reporting resources.  But 
the pledges made in Hong Kong would need to be tracked by those who made those pledges through 
reports which would be subject to international scr utiny.  The joint database, at present, provided a 
more precise definition of Aid for Trade.  Howeve r, it did not provide any disbursement data.  He 
explained that it would involve significant additio nal cost to incorporate infrastructure data. 
C. OECD
 CONTRIBUTION TO WTO  MONITORING FRAMEWORK  
42. Regarding monitoring quality,  the representative of the OECD  said monitoring increased 
transparency and international scrutiny and that this  was called the spotlight effect.  He said the donor 
and in-country reporting templates we re being developed to be as simple as possible, since there was a 
demand for a system that generated manageable i nputs, with limited number of questions.  These 
questions would stimulate discussions, accountability,  learning and improvement with low transaction 
costs.  Monitoring would create a knowledge networ k through the regional events planned by the 
WTO.   
43. He concluded with a recap of the OECD's contribution to the monitoring framework.  First, 
the OECD would use the CRS to provide the data  for the tier one global monitoring to track the 
overall trends in terms of the composition and the geogr aphical distribution of Aid for Trade.  In tiers 
two and three, the OECD would organize the desi gn work for the donor and in-country assessments.  
This would be done through technical meetings with the contribution of the World Bank, the 
Multilateral Development Banks in the regions, UNDP, WTO, ITC, the Integrated Framework 
Secretariat, UNCTAD, and other international organizations.   
44. The representative of Pakistan  remarked that preferences were provided when a country was 
not competitive in a specific area and that Aid for Trade was aimed at making these countries WT/COMTD/AFT/M/1 
Page 8  
 
  competitive.  Therefore, it was useful to discu ss preference erosion in the CTD Session on Aid for 
Trade.  
45. The representative of Tanzania
 asked what factor the OECD believes could have caused the 
difference in disbursements between Asia and Afri ca, particularly in regard to expenditures on 
infrastructure. 
46. The representative of Switzerland  said that monitoring was a key component of the Aid for 
Trade Initiative.  It was very important, therefore, that the nature and structure of the database used 
for this purpose would be the best and the data contai ned be of high quality.  He was of the view that 
DAC-OECD database was the best instrument for monitoring Aid for Trade flows.  He supported the statements made by the representatives of the United States and the European Communities on the 
need to avoid duplication with other agencies and to have a simple, practical and efficient monitoring 
mechanism. 
47. The representative of Nigeria
 asked how the objective of subjecting donors and in-country 
assessments to international scrutiny would be achieved.  
48. The representative of Egypt  asked how a recipient country could identify its priorities in 
terms of the need assessment and how the count ry could mainstream trade in its development 
strategies.  He also asked whether there would be  technical assistance available from the WTO or the 
OECD to help achieve these objectives.  He asked  what procedures a beneficiary country was to 
follow to address its specific needs. 
49. The representative of Senegal  said that it was important to work on the definitions of Aid for 
Trade in order to be able to measure new, additiona l funding.  It was also important to have a common 
understanding regarding the monitoring.  This w ould avoid a situation, like that which occurred 
during the High-Level Session on Cotton, where the beneficiary countries refuted certain statements 
made by the donors because they had a different understanding on a number of key issues.   
50. The representative of Benin,  regarding the quality of the monitoring, suggested using a 
system similar to that used in th e context of the cotton initiative.  Th is system used a synoptic table 
that provided information about the nature, the period, the stage of implementation and future 
perspectives of the aid in question.  This would allow a coherent approach to monitoring the aid 
which was being provided.  He also agreed that  the monitoring should be done on the national, sub-
regional and international levels. 
51. The representative of the European Communities  said that developing-country reporting was 
critical for a successful monitoring system.  With r espect to the use of the CRS  in monitoring Aid for 
Trade, he noted that reporting on the pledges by donors was of key importance but that beneficiaries 
should also be comfortable with the system.  He welcomed the inclusion of regional monitoring and 
asked whether the review to take place in Nove mber would use 2005 data or 2006 data.  He also 
asked how the OECD planned to deal with the shortcomings of general budget support as a category 
in the statistics presented to Members for monitoring Aid for Trade. 
52. The representative of Uganda  requested further clarification on the projections of ODA to 
2010 and how these could be used to measure th e additionality of Aid for Trade, as well as the 
definition used in compiling the data.  He also  asked what the difference would be between the 
national assessments and the regional assessments, especially since some aid was given to some countries in a region.  He suggested that anot her presentation be made at a later date on the 
methodology for measuring Aid for Trade.  Otherwise, it would be difficult for Members to 
distinguish Aid for Trade from general overseas development aid.  WT/COMTD/AFT/M/1 
 Page 9 
 
 
  53. The representative of the United States  said that there where inherent problems with the Aid 
for Trade definition that made it difficult to arrive at perfect data and to capture the additional detail 
sought by the task force.  She hoped that delegations  would consult with their capitals on this issue. 
54. The representative of Canada  said that it made sense to morph the Aid for Trade monitoring 
system into the CRS.  This would allow building up on existing reporting structures, thereby helping to 
overcome some of the reporting challenges.  It would also allow Members to move from a 
commitment basis to a disbursement basis, which was more accurate and helpful.  He also agreed with 
the two-tiered Aid for Trade definition used in  the presentation.  He expressed support for the 
tentative schedule of work that was outlined by th e Chairman and welcomed the involvement of the 
regional development institutions.  
55. The representative of the OECD  in reply to the questions posed by Members clarified the 
relationship between pledges, commitments and disbursements.  He said the pledging process at international events drove commitments in the sen se that on the donor side, there was a relationship 
between the pledges that have been made and the a llocation of aid to particular purposes.  However, 
this was not meaningful until there was a signed commitment to do something very specific and 
concrete, according to a specific timetable.  Therefore, commitment statistics revealed what happened 
at the upstream level, while pledges were even fu rther upstream.  Disbursements statistics revealed 
how fast implementation was happening, at least in te rms of the financial disbursements.  This is what 
made the creditor reporting system so relevant si nce the current WTO-OECD database cannot track 
disbursements.  So, disbursements were always lo wer than commitments because there was a pipeline 
process, and this process took time.  There could be unforeseen problems, or there could be some 
slowness in the system, in which case, the annual Ai d for Trade debate and the monitoring system 
would help to identify the problems a nd find solutions to these problems.   
56. Regarding the adjustment process in preference  dependent countries, he said that economic 
diversification was one the objectives of Aid for Trade.   So the fact that trade-related adjustment was 
included in the definition of Aid for Trade by th e Task Force last year was extremely relevant. 
57. On the question posed by Tanzania, on why were disbursements in Asia for infrastructure are 
much bigger than in Africa, he  said that there was now a new emphasis on raising infrastructure 
investment in Africa.  This was not without difficulties as there was still a lot of emphasis on 
governance aid. However, he emphasized that infr astructure problems needed to be addressed.   
58. Regarding Nigeria's question on how to subject do nors to international scrutiny, he said that 
this was currently being done by the OECD-DAC, although, some donors did not like it.  However, 
there was consensus that this w as a process that should continue and be done in a way where donors 
would agree to be scrutinised again.   
59. On Egypt's question about mainstreaming, he  replied that the Enhanced Integrated 
Framework could play an important role in this regard.  He also said that second generation poverty 
reduction strategies, which had increased trade a nd growth content, were also relevant.  
60. Regarding Senegal's comment on the relevance of the WTO's Sectoral Initiative for Cotton 
and the importance of getting an understanding of what  was relevant support, he believed that the Aid 
for Trade monitoring mechanism could learn from the discussions on cotton.  He highlighted the 
importance of having a well-articulated national tr ade development strategy in the cotton producing 
countries, as well as, well-articulated regional strategi es.  He took note of Benin's suggestion to use 
templates based on tables to provide information fo r the monitoring mechanism similar to what was 
being done in the context of the Cotton Initiative. WT/COMTD/AFT/M/1 
Page 10  
 
  61. On the issue raised by the European Communiti es about tracking the fulfilment of pledges, he 
said that the WTO database was not adequate because it did not reflect disbursements.  Therefore, it was not possible to see whether the pledge had been fulfilled by looking at the WTO database.  It was 
necessary to look at other data.  Donors who made pledges at Hong Kong would have to track their 
own pledge fulfilments and report this to CTD Se ssion on Aid for Trade.  Regarding the data that 
would be available for the November review m eeting, he said only full data for 2005 would be 
available.   
62. Next he addressed Uganda's question about th e relationship between Aid for Trade and ODA 
in the projections to 2010.  He said that the Ai d for Trade data was based on the expanded definition 
from the task force and the projections showed how  Aid for Trade, using the new definition, would 
expand if it kept the same share of total ODA.  This would occur in a context where ODA was, 
according to pledges made, being scaled up.  The proj ections also showed what would happen if the 
volume of Aid for Trade doubled, in which case th ere would be extra resources going into Aid for 
Trade in the order of between US$15 to US$20 b illion.  He warned that towards 2010 it would 
become harder to actually get disbursements because of the complexity of the advanced Aid for Trade 
projects and the time needed to approve those projects. 
63. He recalled that the representative of Uganda  asked for a meeting on statistical methodology 
so that Members would be clear what was meant by Ai d for Trade.  In this regard, he warned against 
trying to become too scientific and too specific a bout the definition, because different countries had 
different Aid for Trade strategies according to thei r own context and their own vision of where they 
could create competitive advantages.  Therefore,  it was up to the individual countries to define the 
scope of their own Aid for Trade strategy and to ask donors to help them with it.  He noted that the 
experience of the Asian miracle countries showed  that each had very different Aid for Trade 
strategies.  He believed the Aid for Trade definitio n should not be restricted in a way which would 
confine countries' thinking or imagination on strate gy formulation.  At the same time, a precise 
definition of Aid for Trade and an effective track ing mechanism were needed.  This contradiction 
could be resolved by using the three-tiered system of review that was being proposed, and including 
the regional level.   
64. The representative of Haiti
 asked what was the difference between aid for development and 
Aid for Trade. 
65. The representative of the Secretariat  said that Aid for Trade was part of ODA and what the 
WTO was aiming to do was to make a more important and effective part ODA.  Aid for Trade was 
also aimed at making developing countries part of an inclusive globalisation process so they could 
generate growth and ach ieve poverty reduction. 
66. The Chairman  thanked the OECD representative and all the Members for their 
thought-provoking interventions.  He concluded the meeting by recalling that the Secretariat was to 
circulate a schedule of meetings on Aid for Trade as soon as possible. 
67. The meeting was adjourned . 
 
__________